The ONLY undeniable truth to “Climate Change” or “Global Warning” is that politicians use it to scare people into believing it in order for them to line their pockets with cash.

Leftists have no morals or ethics. Obama and his liberal cronies hate the Constitution and free market capitalism. He destroyed our economy with measures like the ACA and immigration amnesty. The Affordable Care Act has been nothing short of a disaster. My health insurance bill is up to $550/month. (Compare this to my $25/month car insurance from Insurance Panda or my $10/month renters insurance… both private enterprise!)

Obama cared more about his climate change cult than he did keeping Americans safe.

You have ignored all facts. The economy is booming: record high employment, stock market, etc. You can’t read? Healthcare and car insurance aren’t even close to comparable. I read comments like this and understand just who elected this doofus to the highest office in land. And if you don’t understand the obvious, what would you know about climate change?

If you can’t accept the fact the climate has changed and will continue to change for as long as the Earth is around, you don’t understand the obvious. Tell me what happened to the climate prophets that predicted manmade Global Cooling in the 1970’s?. Answer: they got work writing bogus articles about Manmade Global Warming 20 years later.

You got played, Gtr Grrl. This guy posts about his insurance everywhere, it’s to entice you to go to his insurance company… But, it’s pretty obvious that you’re not interested in anything other than your opinion. Take your ignorance somewhere like huffpo where you could be considered an intellectual.

Gt Grrl you have ignored the fact that your mind no longer functions and that you are stupid in believing what you read, also you are arrogant beyond belief (meaning of course stupid again) economy booming right….go back to kindergarten and start all over again maybe you will get some things right then

He said “health insurance” – not “healthcare”. You don’t do comprehension too well. Healthcare and car insurance aren’t remotely comparable. Health insurance and car insurance are perfectly analogous. BTW – Health insurance does not guarantee healthcare, nor is it a prerequisite. A bit of propaganda that your kind is constantly throwing around, but failing to convince anybody. And he is right. My PRIVATE employer provided health insurance premiums and deductibles have gone through the roof since ACA was enacted. Until then, they were fairly flat for 30+ years.

You are completely correct, about health and auto insurance, I mean. They are not comparable. One, the auto, is a private enterprise that makes a profit, fills a need and is still “affordable” (see that little play on words there?) The other is none of those, by that I mean it is costing the country untold amounts of money, was forced upon us without clear need and without our consent , doesn’t fill really any need,and is without any doubt not “affordable”. It seems to me that johnsmith’s comment is much more accurate than your’s, or perhaps you didn’t read the article to which this comment section is attached. Seems obvious to me.

Gtr Grrl, you are an idiot. We have record LOW % of workforce employed in the USA. If one graduates HS or college and cannot find a job the US Gov does NOT consider them unemployed. Just one example to show those who are uneducated why UM figures published by Gov are untrue.

GLIBAL WARMING IS FALSE—- Nearly all current temperatures released have been through homogenisation. This is when they change the actual temp recorded supposedly to account for the variables that may have caused an inaccurate reading. Problem is that while they claim to use readings from nearby recording stations what they consider nearby is often a higher temp from an island 600 miles away. Look up how many record low temps have been actually recorded this year compared to record highs. Hands down, record lows wins 50 to one. Do some research on co2 in our atmosphere. For thousands of years bases on ice core samples the temp has always gone up first followed by a rise in CO2 Levels. In order for the global warming hoax to be true then co2 levels would always go up first. But co2 follows temp rise. Makes since took. Warmer weather means more plant growth both marine and land plants which would boost co2 levels. And after temps fall the CO2 Levls fall based in the very same ice core samples dating back not a thousand years, not ten thousand but over 250 thousand years this fact is constant!!!!!! Climate change fanatics should stop believing all you hear and really do some OVJECTIVE re esearch

Gator’s Girl: he probably knows the International Standard Atmosphere, first established as factual around 1864, then adopted internationally around 1920,

sets the temperature, pressure, and humidity of our global atmsophere and that it hasn’t changed one whit since we adopted it, meaning, that the fact climate is NOT changing,is part of internationalregulatorycalibrationand physical standards law.

So – good luck with that ”The cold nitrogen bath is a giant magic heedur” story.

Mann refused to supply his data or software to the Canadian courts, something absolutely needed for him to prove he wasn’t a fraud. He’s been found in contempt of court, and his defamation lawsuit dismissed.

Yesterday, a low elevation station near the west coast of Greenland was reporting snow in progress. I know it is Greenland, but even there, low elevation July snow is rare.

Then even with 24 hours of sunshine, temperatures in Baffin Island were in the upper teens to low 20’s (F).

The GFS model continues to show cold midsummer outbreaks for the eastern half of the US and Canada at least through 7/20. The FNN (Fake News Networks) will no doubt spin the unusual cold to be a result global warming and a Mann-made appearance of the dreaded polar vortex!

Indeed the debate is over. Liberal politics corrupts everything that it touches and science is no exception. For enough grant money science will gladly prostitute itself to any narrative that you desire.

Does nobody know how to read anymore? The scientists have massaged the data to remove cyclical hot-cold swings of temperature. The cycles invalidate both “Global Warming” and “Global Cooling.” If the Earth naturally cycles in temperature over years to decades, the whole baloney of chicken-little sky-is-falling climate nonsense needs to hit the trash can of bad ideas,

Climate theory belongs in the trash can, next to the theory of the flat Earth at the center of the Universe, and the first humans living just ~6,000 years ago in paradise until an absentminded father-figure expelled them forever for the crime of breaking one stupid rule. That’s right, there is just as much hard evidence for man-made climate change as for the mythical Garden of Eden: Zero!

HOLD ON A MOMENT—In 1978 I use to live in upstate New York. I remember one morning at 6 AM I was on the way to the firehouse and the temperature was -30 F. a few years before that -50F was measured in Malone, New York. How does -33 C constitute the coldest temperature measured in the northern hemisphere???

You guys really are deplorable. You show one part of the Greenland ice sheet budget and ignore the rest, claiming that you’re the true arbiters of what is science or what isn’t.

That would be like showing Columbia House’s DVD sales for one day, ignoring all the costs, competitive market analysis, and P&L history, and then claiming that Columbia House is the future of video distribution, and THEN calling yourselves corporate finance experts and that the people who really put together the P&L were the ones who didn’t know what they were talking about.

Tony Heller — So this response to GrahamCat’s reasonable post is the best you can do, is it? You present your information above as if it’s a startling rebuttal to climate change research in Greenland; and I suppose you earnestly hope that that is how it will be read. Mightn’t it then be worth your making the effort to tell Graham and the rest of us why he is wrong to be critical of it?That would be the proper response, of course. But then you would have to justify your having to cherry-pick your information and give it a special significance, all with the express intention of deceiving your gullible readers. And that wouldn’t do at all, would it?

Tony Heller – From what I can tell, your entire blog is devoted to maligning the work of climate researchers and libeling the people themselves in the crudest way. You accuse them of corruption and of falsifying their data for reasons that are perhaps clear to you and your readers, but much less so to fairer, more rational people. It’s clear that you set out to deliberately distort the results of researchers’work and to fabricate your own facts that accord more neatly with your personal prejudices. You seem to work tirelessly to that end so perhaps it’s not to be wondered at that you can manange nothing more taxing here than “It’s total BS”. Feeble though this response is, though, I imagine your acolytes here think it’s terrifically clever. So that’s something.

Jeremy, while I greatly appreciate your best effort at speaking on a strictly scientific basis, could you please show us “acolytes” exactly where Tony is wrong? You may have to “dumb it down” for those of us with scientific training and background.

I’m afraid we are not accustomed to judging facts based upon our emotions and beliefs, so please forgive us and have patience.

Gator69 –If you seriously expect me to outine all the reasons – or even some of them – why Tony Heller is wrong about his position on climate science in general, or why his article on “Greenland’s record coldest July” is disingenuous to the point of being a deceit, in particular, I should probably have to construct my own blog to do it. If that is to be done, I’m afraid it’s something you will have to wait some time for.While you might well appreciate my speaking on a “a strictly scientific basis” you would be wrong to do so. It will be clear to most people, I think, that there was no scientific content in my comments: it was a subjective view only; and in spite of your closing remarks, such a comment is reasonable given the kind of forum this is and the time available to me to make it. When I do submit a paper for consideration it will not be on this blog.“Those of us with scientific training and background”. I wouldn’t dream of insulting you by suggesting this is a claim that is not true, that it is said merely in the hope of lending authority to your comments. Some cynical people may interpret your words this way though, so very often it’s best not to take this route.

Jerry McManus, comes along with a statement that is a howler since Tony’s post was very small.

“Gator69 –If you seriously expect me to outine all the reasons – or even some of them – why Tony Heller is wrong about his position on climate science in general, or why his article on “Greenland’s record coldest July” is disingenuous to the point of being a deceit, in particular, I should probably have to construct my own blog to do it. If that is to be done, I’m afraid it’s something you will have to wait some time for.”

Sure Jerry, sure.

Neither you or Graham Cat,has yet to come up with a SINGLE detailed counterpoint to Tony’s very small blog post,which indicate to me that you two are full of crap,you are here to create fog,nothing more.

Jeremy,comes up with another ZERO counterpoint comment,because he is here to whine about Tony’s style:

“Tony Heller – From what I can tell, your entire blog is devoted to maligning the work of climate researchers and libeling the people themselves in the crudest way. You accuse them of corruption and of falsifying their data for reasons that are perhaps clear to you and your readers, but much less so to fairer, more rational people. It’s clear that you set out to deliberately distort the results of researchers’work and to fabricate your own facts that accord more neatly with your personal prejudices….”

Meanwhile Jeremy is more like a Troll than honest debater since he has yet to contribute to a counterpoint to Tony’s post.

It appears Jeremy has nothing useful for us to chew on,because he can’t since what Tony posted comes straight out of the DMI link and he KNOWS IT!

Admit it Jeremy, you are here to sow fog and confusion,because YOU ARE that way.

You do like to cherry-pick, don’t you? Old habits die hard, I suppose.

Project much Jeremy? Please show me where I have cherry picked anything.

Unlike genocidal alarmists, I look at the whole picture, and when I do I find nothing unusual about our current climate or how we got here.

How about some science Jeremy?

1- List all climate forcings, order them from most to least effectual, and then quantify them all.

2- Please provide even one peer reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as the cause of recent, or any, global climate changes.

There is nothing unusual or unprecedented about our climate, or how we got here. For 4,500,000,000 years climates have always changed, naturally. This means there has been a set precedent, and the burden of proof falls on natural climate change deniers like yourself.

AndyG55 – You seem to have been brought to the point of apoplexy by my comment that the oft-repeated claim that Greenland’s record cold point in July suggests a significantly important counter to global warming, is disingenuous. ‘RealClimateScience’ has run this story because Tony Heller posted a tweet (a tweet, for goodness’ sake!) to it, and here it sits attracting excitable comments like yours, and its significance continues to gather momentum for the deniers – again, like you.

The temperature we’re discussing here happened on one day only and it was an extreme departure from the norm; this was not, after all, a particularly significant event, apparently – not, at least, in the way that you and your fellow deniers would like it to be.SummitScience, the website that Heller cites finds nothing in this event worthy of mention.

Heller accompanies a graph and a chart with the comment, “Almost all of Greenland’s surface is gaining ice. In fact, Greenland has gained a record amount of ice this year, and the ice is melting slowly.” This might well be true; but without adding context, it’s meaningless. What, for example, are the relative gains and losses of the ice? Luckily, we have the DMI to refer to, the very website Heller has sourced but oddly has not read.It is entitled, Current Surface Mass Budget Of The Greenland Ice Sheet, and its summary is clear and unambiguous: “The calving loss is greater than the gain from surface mass balance, and Greenland is losing mass at about 200 Gt/year.

Genocidal alarmists! That’s a new one on me.Anyway, unlike them, you look at the whole picture, you say. If you do, it’s a pretty myopic view you have, I suspect. Perhaps it’s why you see nothing unusual about our current climate – and why you have difficulty seeing how you got here.

You ask me to supply you with a detailed list of climate forcings and, rather surprisingly, only one peer-reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as a cause of … global climate change. Phew! What a task-master you are!

To take the second item first, I’m pretty sure no paper exists that argues that natural forcings are not a contributory cause of global warming. Indeed, everything I’ve ever read on this subject emphphatically states the opposite: that they do and must. Well that was easy enough.

So far as the first part of the homework is concerned, such a comprehensive and detailed list is readily available using online recources and if you are able to rouse yourself sufficiently to use them you will have more accurate answers than perhaps I will give you.

But of course your purpose in asking for this information is really only so that deficiencies in my understanding, if there are any, can be shown up and used to your advantage. All right, that is fair enough, many here will say. But my ignorance does not strengthen your case. To do that you must produce qualitative counter evidence for your position, and that is something that neither the entire weird world of AGW deniers nor you as one miniscule cog in its machinery is willing or able to do.

By the way, the remarks I made about your evident liking for cherry-picking was a reference to your selective reading of points in my earlier post. Perhaps it’s your myopia interfering again.

Jeremy, you are a hot mess. First you thought Graham’s comment was “reasonable”, then you attribute my comment to Andy, and now admit you are ignorant of the science.

You ask me to supply you with a detailed list of climate forcings and, rather surprisingly, only one peer-reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as a cause of … global climate change. Phew! What a task-master you are!

To take the second item first, I’m pretty sure no paper exists that argues that natural forcings are not a contributory cause of global warming. Indeed, everything I’ve ever read on this subject emphphatically states the opposite: that they do and must. Well that was easy enough.

No answers, just BS from Jeremy.Dog ate his homework.The questions were:“1- List all climate forcings, order them from most to least effectual, and then quantify them all.2- Please provide even one peer reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as the cause of recent, or any, global climate changes.”He answered neither.

You can’t answer them Jeremy because the answers don’t exist.

The science has not advanced to the point where all the climate forcings are known nor do we fully understand the relationships and interdependencies of those that we do know about. New papers are published all the time on this subject. Hell, we’re still trying to figure out if cosmic rays actually have a part in cloud formation.

You can’t answer the 2nd question because such a paper does not exist. How could it when we still even haven’t figured out all the branches of the carbon cycle? We don’t even know where all the carbon is sequestered yet. And how could there be such a paper when all the answers to question number 1 are not known?

This is a correction that I should have posted long ago as a matter of courtesy to Tony Heller. That it has taken this long to do it is shameful, I know. I put it down to needing to sleep (I’m in England, after all) but getting too involved in the chit-chat on this thread.

My original post was addressed to Tony because his is the name that appears at the top of the page. To Tony himself and to others who read it, its disproportionate content must have been startling.

Of course, he merely posted an item of interest to the site; he may well be sympathetic to its views but he is not responsible for the site itself, as I’d supposed.

So my apologies to you Tony, and I hopeyou are able to find time to read this.

Dare I suggest that even others here who strongly deny the proposition that AGW is a reality will struggle to supress their mirth when they read your contribution. All right, perhaps I’m alone with that.But I’m afraid your comments amount to no more than a confession that you don’t know very much about what’s going on in climate research – or indeed about any aspect of the climate, come to that (“we don’t even know where all the carbon is sequestered”!).

You make the point – and it’s a rather obvious point – that there is much we don’t know about climate forcings. That’s perhaps broadly true of most contributing factors involved in the climate, I guess. But what of that? The point is that incomplete though the evidence might be for AGW – and we’re talking about evidence from an astonishingly wide range of independent disciplines, all them in broad agreement, remember – is sufficient by any reasonable person’s measure, to take the subject seriously and give it the benefit of any doubt.It’s sufficient, put another way, not to be blithly dismissed as a liberal conspiracy – that great, comical, American delusion.

Yes, you’re quite right: I addressed the comment to the wrong person. It doesn’t surprise me though: one denier’s views. very soon meld into another’s. They become indistinguishable. It won’be long before you’re all addressed as Andy -or even RAH! Which will save time of course.

That aside I think you have misunderstood my post. So far as I am aware, NO papers suggest that natural variabilty hasn’t a role in climate change. Or put another way, NO paper denies or refutes natural variation having a contributory role. Or put another way … No, maybe that’s enough.

But I’m afraid your comments amount to no more than a confession that you don’t know very much about what’s going on in climate research – or indeed about any aspect of the climate…

Jeremy, why do you insist on projecting your own ignorance onto everyone else? Most of the regulars here have formal scientific training, and have spent decades studying climate. I myself was a climatology student at a major university shortly after the ice age scare ended, and right before the great global warming swindle began. I have followed the science closely ever since, reading each study for myself as they are published. This is why I am a skeptic, because I understand the subject very well, unlike you.

You show just how shallow a thinker you are by coming here and posting comments when you know full well you have no clue what you are yammering about.

An intelligent person would never dream of commenting on subjects about which they know nothing. And then there is Jeremy.

You guys really are deplorable. You show one part of the Greenland ice sheet budget and ignore the rest, claiming that you’re the true arbiters of what is science or what isn’t.

That would be like showing Columbia House’s DVD sales for one day, ignoring all the costs, competitive market analysis, and P&L history, and then claiming that Columbia House is the future of video distribution, and THEN calling yourselves corporate finance experts and that the people who really put together the P&L were the ones who didn’t know what they were talking about.

Colorado Wellington –Thank you for your post.I took Graham’s post to be from a man – it’s more usually a man’s name in England, but perhaps that’s not the case in the USA. Either way, when I read it I focussed on what to me was a good point: “You show one part of the Greenland … were talking about”. This was a reasonable point to make and should, in my view, have brought a reasonable answer from someone who, we are to believe, is sufficiently on the ball that he feels qualfied to dismantle the research results of modern climate science.As for your question to me perhaps I should refer you to my second post to Tony Heller for the answer. I can expand it a little by adding that blogs like this one do a great disservice to both climate research and to rational, reasoned scepticism – something which, although it will no doubt be disputed here, exists comfortably in the field and is welcomed by researchers. Here, in this blog the default setting for both the site’s publishers – if that’s the word – and the majority of its readers is to reject climate research as a sort of reflex. It’s a given to them that the entire community of climate scientists are either corrupt or incompetent. That is not a rational position to take but it clearly is the favoured one.

I may have erred in thinking that the above poster self-identified as Graham Cat’s was a lady. I simply didn’t want to appear sexist by assuming that his/her scientific comment had to come from a man. It is also true that living in very progressive Boulder I know just as many hysterical men as I know women, and even a few who don’t identify as either.

On the other hand, I do know several highly intelligent, educated and scientifically accomplished ladies who are readers of this blog. What criteria did you use to say that you and other critics of Tony Heller’s work are ”fairer, more rational people”? And how did you come to the conclusion that Tony Heller and the majority of the readers of this blog ”reject climate research as a sort of reflex”? Did you actually read any of the posts?

Since you didn’t address it, let me ask again:

What do you think of the assorted evidence collected at this blog?

———-You are, of course, entitled to whatever opinion you have but some facts would be nice.

Well, let me say I got here by reading in my Google feed that one temperature reading on one day in one part of Greenland set a cold record and that disproved warming trends over the entire globe. You want the headline to draw attention, right ? I started reading the article, and saw a plot of ice mass increase with no labels as to what is depicted. Come to find out, the caption specifying the time frame Sept. – April was conveniently removed. There is a season of snow and one of melt, and a chart of overall ice gain must include the full tally. Deceiving to say the least.

Because last winter had an unusually large number of storms in the arctic producing precipitation… snow, in other words…

The changing arctic climate dumped a lot more snow

and yet Greenland is melting – I notice you don’t show the graphs covering the high melt levels in N and W Greenland this year – and shedding mass, as warming causes glaciers to dump ice at a faster rate.

and yes there is a lot more ice around Svalbard – because those same storms pushed it out toward the Atlantic where it will now melt.

Leaving, very probably, a record low extent come September.

Really, you have to ask what is behind all this – and look at an abnormally warm, relatively speaking, arctic winter with increased storms.

Isn’t there a lot of geothermal activity in greenland/iceland? So, regardless of how much ice there is, there will always be melt with volcanic vents and such? Did these “scientists” forget about this? Also ignore their documented papers on the next ice age they were predicting in the 70’s and 80’s. But despite all this we are the science deniers.

On the left is ONE day in 2017. Within a year there is gain and loss of ice. Much of the gain is due to snow, which soon melts, differing from ice pack. I took a look at the ice measurement site from which these originated, and it is apparent they are to merely show an example of ice tracking. There is no analysis or case made that it’s an indicator of any total gain or loss, an obvious point to those who think scientifically. Leave it to a site like this to use it as a basis to denounce all of climate science and to make the claim there is no melting TREND in Greenland like all of the legitimate organizations have shown.

From the same web site where they cherry picked some stuff that confirms what they wish to believe, the carefully avoid this:“Over the year, it snows more than it melts, but calving of icebergs also adds to the total mass budget of the ice sheet. Satellite observations over the last decade show that the ice sheet is not in balance. The calving loss is greater than the gain from surface mass balance, and Greenland is losing mass at about 200 Gt/yr.”

Are you saying they really didn’t just want to send me 12 cds for a penny (plus shipping and handling) and instead they were hoping I’d continue to take their cd of the month? Because they scammed me with casettes, 8 tracks and lps, so I can’t imagine that they would do the same thing to me 4 times. Columbia House is clearly the worst house in Hogwarts.

No, it’s a Geoid. But hemisgeoid is clunky. It’s close enough to a sphere for all intents and purposes and besides, that’s how words work. A pineapple isn’t a pine; nor is it and apple. A starfish is neither a fish nor a star. So stop being a sanctimonious know it all doink.

I am finding this whole global warming thing very difficult to understand. Let’s see if I have it right…The warmer the globe gets, the colder it gets??!!!It’s all so confusing. I guess we need lefty geniuses to explain it to us. Al?!!

First, you show the mass budget image showing mass diffs from September 1st of last year until now. This encompasses the entire Arctic winter and the cool early Summer months. Cherrypick much?

Then you use this image to claim “Almost all of Greenland’s surface is gaining ice.” Let’s forget for a moment that you chose an image which ignores the biggest melt months of the year. Had you chosen a correct image, you could still have shown that more of the surface of the ice sheet HAS gained mass since 1980. However, those gains are small in magnitude, whereas the areas losing mass have done so rapidly. The second effect by far overwhelms the first. We’re talking about net mass loss of well over 1,000 cubic miles just since 2002. This is highly intuitive: ice melts from the edges first.

At present you are a third-rate fraud. If you could just suppress your instincts the defraud and mislead for a few seconds, and present your arguments in a logically self-consistent manner, you could perhaps become a second-rate fraud.

As a stock market guy, the above chart represents a “saucer bottom” with a now established uptrend in place. The scary part, if this were a stock, is that it projects a return to where it was 9-10,000 years ago. Perhaps those peeps back in the mid 70’s predicting a new ice age were right after all!

Fraud boy, it is clear you didn’t read the link carefully since NONE of it supports your assertions at all. Not only that it is dated June 30,2017 thus almost current time,here is what the state of the ice pack was based on the 1981-2010 mean which is right there on the chart:

Would you be so kind to explain how Greenland is losing all of this ice mass when the temperatures on the top of the ice mass very seldom get above freezing and when they do, just barely get above freezing for a couple of hours? I seriously doubt that geothermal heat is a source of significant melt and even if it were, it would have nothing to do with AGW.

If ice sheet is calving, why would calving be more now than during any other time in history? More calving is a result of more snowfall, not less.

Our Fourth Rate polar explorer didn’t learn about the freezing point of water from some school books.

He knows his Arctic water and it’s not like some wussy metrosexual New York City tap water that wimps out and freezes at 0°C. No Sir, this is tough Russian water that defied cold temperatures since Joseph Stalin ordered the conquest of the White North. It stays liquid to at least -48°C and more if under Party instructions. Such class-aware, battle-hardened water is not going to sit idly and frozen on top of Greenland ice sheet just because it’s still a couple of degrees below zero Celsius. It will get up and do its job long before the temperature rises to that point.

Greenland mass balance is going to take another spine up. Huge amount of snow forecast for south and central Greenland this week.Where ever “global warming’ is, it’s not in Greenland or Antarctica right now! Both extremely cold right now.

RAH,Sorry for jumping in like this and off topic, but I was referred to you from another site when I started asking if anyone had heard anything about the latest ELD regulations and their impact on the trucking industry (just found a story on it myself despite the Final Rule passing 2 years ago). I was concerned because of the sentiment many (over 40%) drivers/owners have of leaving the industry because of these regulations and the impact it could have on our nation. Any insight would be appreciated- thank you!

I was one of the last in my company to go on e-logs and only did so when they forced me and the rest of us holdouts to. I have been on e-logs now for over two years and it isn’t as bad as I thought it would be.

I do FTL, and LTL trucking. I go where they need me to go whenever they need me to go within the hours of service requirements.

The last run I did before starting my vacation was one I had never done before. It had five stops in IL and IN and started and returned to Hebron, KY (SW of Cincinnati by the airport). I got it all done within the legal time limit though I had only 1.25 hrs remaining on my 14 hr duty day when I finished. However, since I was bobtailing home to Anderson, IN I could log the trip home as “Off duty driving”.

There is a lot more to being a successful driver than skill behind the wheel. One must think ahead and manage their time/logs as efficiently as possible. Guys that can’t do that need to work in hourly jobs or doing a dedicated route where they drive the same route day after day.

Hi TonyI hope you read this one.The old Vancouver Stock Exchange was known for promotions.There is a definition of a promotion:“In the beginning, the promoter has the vision and the public has the money.At the end of the promotion, the promoter has the money and the public has the vision.”

Unless people realize that the SUN is creating all of the cold and hot snaps since the earth existed, the people will never comprehend the importance of it and will continue to believe the lying man.We rotate around a variable intensity star that changes its energy flux on daily bases. Now, measure the IR and UV rays every day that reach the surface of earth and you will become your own climate scientist and can predict the cold and worm snaps in near future.The climate and weather patters change all of the time, irrespectable of the human activity, I hope some of you will think twice before blindly believe the fabricated temps and data collections manipulations.

Great comment. I was wondering the other day if our orbit around the sun is always the same exact path year after year with no variations. Because if for one year or for several years we drifted slightly closer to the sun wouldn’t that raise temperatures and vice versa? Yet humans are at fault and not a very complex Earth, atmosphere and universe.

This isn’t the original post I remembered from several years ago, but it gives a good explanation on changes in speed and rotation. The post I was trying to find was a scientist explaining that Earth’s shape has changed over the millennia- the planet used to be more ellipse-like and spun more quickly but slowly became more spherical as mass settled around the equator and the spin rate has slowed.

The planar project of the orbit is elliptical. For a bit less than half of the year, the Earth is closer to the sun than its mean distance (note, that is a statistical summary of the actual time stepped positions) and for a bit more than half of the year the Earth is further away from the sun than its mean distance. TOA insolation varies by about 7% each year, due to the 0.17 mean eccentricity of the orbit, and that eccentricity is variable. It gets closer to zero (more circular) at times and further from zero at times (more elliptical). The net effect depends on land distribution, obliquity (axial tilt, which varies from 22.1 degrees to 24.5 degrees), solar activity (the sun is a variable star, even though the total TSI doesn’t vary much, the proportion of UV output does vary significantly), galactic position (more dusty parts versus less dusty parts, and interstellar interaction (think what a faint dwarf star could do to the solar system if it passed close enough to it).

He said his old data had errors in it and he has now corrected the errors, to show some warming — a warming of 18 hundredths of one degree over nearly 20 years, no less! One hundredth of a degree per annum!

Carl’s adjustments were so bad in fact that the paper in which he described them was rejected as unpublishable by a major climate journal, eventually being accepted by a meteorological one.

I live in Germany and it’s been downright cold. Sure it’s just one part of the world but for three years, it’s been cold and this summer is freezing. We’re wearing jackets in July and using heat because it’s so cold. We’ve had days recently with HIGHS in the fifties. We’ve yet to have a warm day this year.

If you look at a much broader picture, what’s actually happening is that we’ve been coming out of the mini ice age which lasted until about 1880…exactly when global warmists start their data because otherwise it falls apart.

And the slack-jawed Mike Wallace sat there like a dead fish himself. He never once appeared to wonder let alone question Algore about where Miami Beach went if Miami’s streets are underwater. Insane is the word that comes to mind. Well, corrupt also.

If you’re driving down the side of a mountain, and the road has a small rise in elevation but the overall trajectory is going down hill, you’re the type when we reach the slight rise to scream, “See, descending is a liberal lie, we’re going up hill. See, it’s all lies. Science is a lie, people who listen to science are liars, news is fake, up is down, coal is clean, we’re going up hill!!!!”

Every year may be different, but it is trends that are of concern. Crazy Navy guy, look into what your employer knows about warming waters and higher sea level and how it will likely negatively effect the mission. As far as God taking millennia, he can still do that, while we exercise the power he gave us to drill out the product of that millennia from the ocean floor and transfer it to the troposphere. Slow change + fast change = fast change.

+the attack on all cultural values that keep a community together((family,marriage))

and you get Karl Marx perfect poster child.

As communism has nothing to offer,while it tries to possess and controle everything dumbness,perversion,lies,no integrity,dysfuntional peopleare the only place this shitty ideologie can survive.So shitty that even all other shitty ideologies combinedhave not succeeded to produce so many primitive,culturless idiots than the neobolshewiks=progressives nowadays.

The trick is simple:perversion+turning people to traitors acting against their all people:Happened in communist russia/china/yugoslavia etc etc,and all endet in masskillings of the own people.

And if you take a look at those lefties these days:they are against their own people ,calling them nazis forthe slightest sense of pride and patriotism etc,while at the same time fully supporting and protecting ideologies like islam(which is much closer to nazis than anything which are 100% against all values of leftist.

Perhaps Bobbo could explain to us where the water from went? If the Greenland Ice sheet has been losing ice there would be a measurable increase in the rate of SLR unless there was a balancing increase in SMB elsewhere, such as Antarctica. There is no increase in the rate of SLR. Where did all that water go Bobbo?

I am from greenland, I am 27 and I can confirm we had snow this july, and there were more Ice when I was little, I did a little research on google, it says that we hav lost more ice in the past decade than we have lost in 50 years before that. Living in greenland is global warming so obvious. When I was a kid, we used to go out in -30 celsius in the winter, now it doesn’t even go below -25 celsius.we were always fully clothed in the summer, now its too warm for that.

BTW I live in Uummannaq and its not as cold as it used to be, in the summer the heat reaches 20-23 celsius now. except this summer in july when there was snow

Well I’m much more worried about North Korea nuking Tokyo, Seoul, or Anchorage than I am about a little ice melt. If civilization is wiped out in this century it will be either from an asteroid strike or nuclear annihilation.

N.Korea aggression is used to get concessions out of the USA FOR CHINA. Problem is, with President Trump, he is refusing to be blackmailed and is turning economic screws on China for N.Korea aggression.

He is also turning economic screws on Russia for Syria’s behavior

AND turning economic screws on Pakistan for Taliban’s behavior in Afghanistan.

Wow! How did I ever not find this blog. Really appreciate all the information and analysis. Now I have someplace to send the alarmists to in order to educate them. Can someone please direct Bill Nye here so he fades away?

THE FACTS ARE AS BEFORE THE LIBERAL BARRAGE OF HATE AND DISINFOMATION…THE WORLD MAYBE WARMING IN PLACES BUT NOT BY MAN….MAYBE ALL THE LIES AND BULLSHIT THE LIBS HAVE BEEN SCREAMING HAS CAUSED THE HEATING OF THE AIR BUT I DOUBT IS HAS ANY LASTING EFFECT OF THE EARTH…….MOTHER EARTH KNOWS BULLSHIT WHEN SHE SEES IT..

Car exhaust is carbon monoxide not CO2…. CO is definitely a pollutant but it is not a greenhouse gas…CO2 composes .0385 % of the atmospheric gas and the vast majority of CO2 is produced by the oceans not by human beings….www.stopthecrime .net Deborah Tavaras is a lawyer and she is very good she lays bare the whole legal aspect of the climate lie and what their agenda really is…they are violent despots who will stop at nothing….and that is putting it mildly…you cannot reason with a Stalin or a Hitler

Man/Bear/Pig (Al Gore) may need to make another “Inconvenient Truth” movie that no one will watch explaining how full of crap he is and should be imprisoned for fraud and crimes against nature and humanity. He should be stripped of all his homes and private jets and imprisoned indefinitely. He’s nothing, but another government scam artist! I’d like to twist his ugly little head off his neck!

Really people believe that man kind has caused the climate to change…I mean it takes God millennia to do it…we must be pretty powerful…first we made it too hot, then with a little action, an the blessed St Al Gore de Tera help we caused a pause…

Wake up people it was a way to force another tax on you by taxing “carbon” the climate changes all the time…thats why every year is different.

Stopping production of goods in the United States and allowing other countries to go unmonitored, just moves production around, share the wealth, but it’s nothing more then allowing people to pee in the shallow end of the pool, because you swim in the deep end. It’s all gonna mix up!

The World Health (WHO) lists the USA near the top in the world for having the best air quality…among ALL the world’s whiners who complain about us…some 200+ countries.

In fact, when you take into account that the USA is the world’s largest economy, produces more than any other country, has more cars and infrastructure, has the 3rd largest population and has the 3rd largest land area…the USA is the top country by any standards.

We are significantly cleaner than the air in Germany, Italy, Switzerland, the UK, Japan, Austria and France.

• Zabol, IRAN tops the list as the most polluted• INDIA with 7 cities• CHINA, with 3 cities• SAUDI ARABIA, with 3 cities• CAMEROON, with 1 city

NO US city made any ‘Most Polluted’ list. But, China, India, Russia and Saudi Arabia seem to be on many.

AND, THE LIBERAL “FAKE NEWS” MEDIA?

“With such relatively clean air throughout America, how can even reputable news agencies like…” Reuters, BBC, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, the AP “… CONTINUE spreading the well-worn lie that the United States is one of the “biggest polluters” in the world?”

FACT: The countries with slightly lower air pollution than USA have populations that are .00033% to 10.8% of the US population

FACT: The countries with slightly lower air pollution than USA have land areas that are as small as 0.000071% with one exception, Canada with about 1.5% more than US land area

That’s a good list, and you can say the same for water pollution. When the USSR gradually backed out of eastern Europe in the 90’s, we found out these countries were massively polluted (water and soil).

The U.S. has led the world in water treatment and soil remediation, beginning long before the EPA was formed.

The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in someplaces the seals are finding the water too hot according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulate at Bergen Norway Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone.

Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.

Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, thereport continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.

Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea willrise and make most coast cities uninhabitable.

I must apologize. I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922 , as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post 94 years ago. This must have been caused by the Model T Ford’s emissions or possibly from horse and cattle farts.

You had me going at first with that! …until I read the last paragraph.

Yes, someone posted a news piece on this forum from that time period where a Norsk fisherman was bemoaning the fact that he caught no white fish and wasn’t able to club any seals that year. Sounded like sour grapes more than anything else

Alberto Gorez, the noted S. American Global Cooling Climatologist/Thermodynamics Expert, has been warning the world of the current Maunder Minimum, and upcoming Ice Age for two decades…..but the Zionist/Neocon Pro Greater Israel/Jew World Order Media has ignored him.

“Over the year, it snows more than it melts, but calving of icebergs also adds to the total mass budget of the ice sheet. Satellite observations over the last decade show that the ice sheet is not in balance. The calving loss is greater than the gain from surface mass balance, and Greenland is losing mass at about 200 Gt/yr.”

How many of the global warming alarmists, government officials, or politicians are purchasing property in the Arctic and Antarctic; or purchasing property at the altitudes that the higher sea levels are predicted to reach?

I really appreciate this website, I stumbled across it by accident, I’m taking a geography course and was doing some side research on insolation and it took me over to some ancillary data on wikipedia and even they were saying the rise in temp is due to wilfully forcing data to fit a pre-determined value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_irradiance….I have been planting trees for going on 35 years, we’re the guys who replant where loggers cut down trees, industrial forests, not lanscaping, it’s hand planting , not machine planting, and in the biology textbook published in 2016 the book contained blatant lies about logging and the lack of reforestation ??!! I told the professor and he said that’s not the only error in that book either….tree plantoing in the southeast region is a major industry, there are more trees growing in this country than in all its history and the diversification of species is tremendous, sure loblolly and long leaf and short leaf etc.. are the main crop trees but it anytype of tree needed they have and will sell it to the customer. In thew 35 years I have planted trees all over the country from Pacific Northwest , the southeast and the upper Great Lakes I have personally planted over 15 million seedlings that is approximately 50 square miles….the amount of trees planted in a 5 month period down there just calculating the production of the crews I know of is somewhere between 1-2 billion trees not counting up north in the summer that’s between 3-6 million actres a year….the data I ran across regarding logging in the Amazon was nothing more than vicious propaganda, I have done a lot of logging as well, an accurate understanding of how much acreage can be logged by an average crew in a day, in one of the propaganda films put out back in the late 80’s they stated by the ti me your done watching this film they will have cut down another 400 thousand acres of rain forest….in three hours !!!! the people who believe this are fools…the vast majority of the Amazon rainforest is impenetrable…the timber infrastructure of Brazil, is virtually non-existent….to market timber you have to have skid roads to access the land you have to have timber cruisers who can go there and estimate the species of marketable lumber and it’s market value, this implies that huge lumber mills already exist, within range of all those logging trucks running 24/7 , whose processing facilities can can cut and mill trees that large, they then need lumber yards that can market all that lumber to the public and a construction industry that needs all of that lumber , building houses as fast as they can cut the trees……none of this exists in the Amazon…..none of this exists in the Congo, nor Southeast Asia nor any where else in the world where rainforests exist…Canada and the US are #1 and 2 in lumber production in the world and they don’t cut 400 thousand acres in a single day….on flat farm land in Georgia that was rotated from crops to loblolly pine when a company comes in to slick off a chunk of land 1 hydro ax/ feller buncher followed by 3 skidders on a good 10-12 hour day with no down time for heavy equipment repair or upkeep might clear 40 acres in one day maybe….the vast majority of land being cut is not flat farm land it’s mostly hilly or rolling hills and as you get into the piedmont, it gets much steeper….this is in America where all the necessary lumber infrastructure listed has been well established for a long time….I am very happy to find this web-site I am at Pima CC in tucson and I study at U of A alot as well and many of the profs I have met are on board with what you are saying…a prof over in atmosphere is writing his thesis for a doctorate he is from India and he and his associates have been studying the glacial expansion in the western himalayas for decades, up at 6-8 thousand meters, where few people ever go nor care, they have been publishing the data and simple explanation for this and the climate criminals want nothing to do with their findings….so personally I don’t think there is a damn thing they can do to stop it they have screwed the pooch for too long and now chickens are coming home to roost (sorry for the mixing of metaphors but I don’t give a shit) their desperation has become glaring and there is a reaction building they are going to regret….many of the teachers see what is going on despite any liberal bias tthey may currently have and all it takes is a student to post an essay on d2l …most classes are online and you will find the teachers are actually glad to hear some common sense, the younger students may take umbrage as young people often do but a little calm clear simple free speech reasoning and you can feel the ripples begin to spread….oh by the way civil rights is the religion and constitution of the UN and every bit of it is based upon a lie…civil rights is nothing more than racism…slavery was never race specific it was always caste specific…capital could always purchase labor….there were many many white slaves down in the south both before and during the civil war…so much so that the preponderance of evidence points to nthe reason for the civil war was not over black slavery but white slavery…of the 2 million slaves in the south 13 thousand of them were owned by wealthy blacks, wealthy indians owned slaves as well…the first slaves ever brought to this country were not blacks they were white and they were Irish somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 thousand were shipped to this continent by the British to man the plantations and the mines owned by the Crown, because of the fugitive laws the north provided a huge pool for whites to be kidnapped and taken down south to be sold for pennies compared to the legal price…once captured as a slave they had no right of due process it didn’t matter that they had never been a slave…..the civil rights folks don’t want this to be made known….you had Chinese coolie labor that built the railroads in Nothern California,…none of this is ever mentioned the word Slavic comes from the word slave….ironbarkresources.com….the lie of slavery is as blatant as climate change it all comes from communism